Victorian Gender Relations - Book Report/Review Example

Victorian Gender Relations The Victorian novelists, amongst whom are Charles Dickens and Jane Austen, were products of their socio-cultural environment. The assumption here is that the world of their novels would realistically represent social norms and mores. As such, Victorian gender relations would be accurately represented and women would be portrayed in the subordinate social position that Victorian norms and mores had relegated them to. Indeed, as Wilson explains in The World of Charles Dickens, Victorian society had much the same expectations of women as it did of children; both were expected to be seen but not heard (109-110). Interestingly, however, both Dickens’ Great Expectations and Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, portray female characters and protagonist who violate this expectation (109-110). By delving into the respective authors’ portraiture and presentation of Miss Havisham, Estelle and Elizabeth and Jane Bennet, this research will show that, contrary to contemporary expectations and stereotypical perceptions of the Victorian world, both Great Expectations and Pride and Prejudice boast a varied array of female characters. The fact that the majority of these characters hardly subscribes to the stereotypical image of the submissive and passive Victorian female evidences the fact that Victorian social expectations were at odds with the Victorian social reality, on the one hand, and that both Dickens and Austen were writing about a world in transition, on the other. Dickens’ Miss Havisham initially comes across as the victim of male disregard; in other words, she is what she is because of a male’s action. To some extent this is undeniably true but more importantly, her character develops in reaction to Compeyson’s actions and her subsequent determination to prevent a repetition. From twenty minutes after nine on the morning of her wedding day until her death, Miss Havisham lives in a timeless world in which her moment of greatest emotional pain is prolonged indefinitely and becomes one of the two purposes of her existence. The other is revenge on the male sex, a revenge which is accomplished by raising Estella to be a cold-hearted seductress of men's hearts. Miss Havisham's self-imprisonment in Satis House, with every detail of the house, its furnishings, her attire, and the wedding preparations frozen in time, effectively removes her from any possibility of ever being emotionally traumatised again, or so she would like to believe. She inhabits a world that does not change, either physically or spiritually, although her wedding dress, the food, and her own beauty have become subject to the ravages of time. Miss Havisham's seclusion has divorced her from “a thousand natural and healing influences” (Dickens, 411). Pip's commentary on Miss Havisham, as he relates his final discussion with her before her fatal accident, is important: “And could I look upon her without compassion, seeing her punishment in the ruin she was, in her profound unfitness for this earth on which she was placed, in the vanity of sorrow which had become a master mania, like the vanity of penitence, the vanity of remorse, the vanity of unworthiness, and other monstrous vanities that have been curses in this world?” (411) Miss Havisham is advised by Pip to do whatever she can in the future to restore Estella to her “right nature.” She agrees but almost immediately turns the conversation back to herself and, though admitting she has damaged Estella emotionally, demands compassion and understanding from Pip, who, she believes, is unaware of her own suffering at the hands of Compeyson. Pip's resentment of her is evident in this final conversation, leading one critic to describe Pip's struggle with the burning woman as a symbolic rape designed to satisfy Pip's desire for revenge on all of the hateful women at whose hands he has suffered (Hartog, 259-60). But the most significant aspect of this scene is that Miss Havisham is made human once again because of Pip's innocence, suffering, and faithfulness. Pip's capacity to suffer for love reminds Miss Havisham of the person she once was and allows her to recognise the “monstrosity of what she has done and has become” (Slater, 292). Throughout the novel Dickens portrays Miss Havisham as a woman who can display generosity while simultaneously utilizing her wealth as a vehicle for manipulating people. For example, she gives Pip and Joe twenty-five pounds to compensate them for Pip's employment at Satis House (129). She later provides funding for launching Herbert Pocket's career (409). Finally, she seems to spare no expense on Estella, who wears the finest clothing and jewels and receives a good education. Miss Havisham's acts of kindness show that, despite her efforts, she has not been able to shield herself entirely from the “healing influences” of human relationships, and her resultant vulnerability is evident when she upbraids Estella for being cold and indifferent to her (323). Estella’s portrayal is quite disturbing as her detached, unemotional self-analysis has resulted in her being described as “unnatural” and “monstrous” (Monod, 482). It has been argued that Estella marries Drummle in order to gain his wealth and title (Jarmuth, 173). Estella's decision to marry Drummle can only be explained as an overt act of self-destruction. She is cognizant of the fact that he is inferior to her in every way, and she realises that he will physically abuse her. It is this very awareness that horrifies Pip and compels him to exclaim, “God forgive you!” (378), words Estella will recall eleven years later. The violence Estella experiences is, however, only a small part of the overall pattern of violence pervading the novel. Mrs. Joe, who is constantly abusing Joe and Pip and is aroused by her husband's pummelling of Orlick (142-43), becomes the victim of Orlick's vicious attack, which leaves her speechless and paralyzed until her death (146-47). Both Orlick and Drummle engage in acts of violence toward Pip, while Magwich and Compeyson twice engage in life-and-death struggles. The burning of Miss Haversham, the murder committed by Molly, the death masks in Jaggers' office, the minor injuries suffered by Matthew Pocket's many children, the harmless assaults on the students of Biddy's great-aunt, and even Wemmick's cannon are all part of the constant violence permeating every aspect of the novel. The implication here is that in this narrative of distorted relations and violence, the female characters hardly emerge as passive or submissive. Certainly, they are hardly portrayed as positive examples of their gender but that is not the point – the point is that they stand out as an antithesis to the popular image of the Victorian female, indicating the fallacious nature of that image, on the one hand, and the changing nature of the Victorian world, on the other. The implication here is that the popular image is not just a stereotype but expresses the ideal, rather than the real and, even then, that the ideal was gradually being thrust aside by the reality of women as architects of their own fate, or in the case of Dickens’ novel, of their own destruction. Austen’s female characters, especially her protagonist Elizabeth Bennet, stand in direct contrast to Dickens’ female characters. While her female characters are as capable of self-destructive behaviour as are Dickens’, with Kitty being a case in point, self-destruction is an outcome of silliness and superficiality, rather than a consequence of a deliberate need to exact revenge upon others. Further to that, while Dickens’ female characters did not subscribe to the stereotypical image of the Victorian passive and submissive female, they could hardly be described as constructive examples of womanhood. Austen’s characterisation of Jane and Elizabeth, although diametrically opposite to one another, can be described as constructive representations of womanhood with Elizabeth, in particular, emerging as a symbol of the new woman, the woman who is equal to the male. Elizabeth is an unconventional woman but her unconventionality is positively represented. One of the reasons that Elizabeth is an unconventional woman may be that she maintains an equitable relationship with her father. That her father considers her as an equal is apparent from the way he shares his love of ridiculing others with her. Mr. Bennet's respect for her also causes him to caution Elizabeth against marrying Darcy if she is not sure of loving and respecting him as an equal. Had her upbringing been more conventional, she may not have had the opportunity to reject traditional marriage and discover her need for an equal partner. On the other hand, although the freedom of expression and development, which her father has allowed her, has made it possible for her to express her individuality, there is a negative side. Elizabeth's fear of losing her identity causes her to dissociate herself from others and to rely on her sense of superiority. Eventually this kind of detachment may lead to a more permanent isolation (Smith 95). Elizabeth, however, chooses to move away from the attitude of withdrawal and defensiveness to which Charlotte and her father have resorted. She learns that engaging oneself is necessary for understanding and avoiding involvement is restricting. Being objective can limit one's vision, and detachment can prevent self-awareness and the possibility of happiness (Morgan 98). In her relationship with her sister Jane, Elizabeth gives evidence of adapting her feminine strength to troublesome situations. For example, when Mrs. Bennet forces Jane to visit the Bingleys at Netherfield without the carriage in the rain, the illness Jane incurs causes Elizabeth great alarm. n fact, her relationship with Jane reveals the depth of Elizabeth's character because Jane is a foil to Elizabeth. The younger sister can see Jane's lack of penetration into the darker side of people's characters and still respect her for her qualities of kindness and patience. Early feminist critics Gilbert and Gubar suggest that Austen's use of a character who is an opposite of the heroine suggests the need to unify two sides of the self (156). Elizabeth's affection for Jane reveals Elizabeth's acceptance of the side of woman that gives and nurtures and considers pleasing others before herself. However, she fears the vulnerability inherent in this side of herself. The possibility of achieving a balanced perspective and existence is glimpsed at in Elizabeth's nursing of her sister. Elizabeth selflessly nurses Jane back to health at Netherfield, although she clearly does not want to be in the company of Darcy and Miss Bingley. Saying good-bye to the party at Netherfield, “Elizabeth took leave of the whole party in the liveliest spirits” (206); however, she stays there as long as Jane needs her because she loves Jane. Her independence makes her strong, and in her strength, she embraces her responsibility to her sister. In time she learns that caring and responsibility do lead to strength. Jane's passivity is generally approved feminine behaviour, but it contrasts with Elizabeth's activity. While Jane's journey to Netherfield has landed her in a sick bed in a very dangerous condition, Elizabeth's journey by foot, not by horse like Jane's, invigorates her. Upon her appearance after her three mile walk through muddy fields, Darcy “was divided between admiration of the brilliancy which exercise had given to her complexion, and doubt as to the occasion's justifying her coming so far alone” (193). Elizabeth is not concerned with propriety as much as she is concerned for her sister. She is fully aware that no one at Netherfield really cares for Jane except Mr. Bingley, who would be an inadequate nurse. So she acts at the risk of offending Darcy and Miss Bingley because, when a woman acts assertively, she risks being perceived as unladylike. As Miss Bingley points out to Darcy, “To walk three miles, or four miles, or five miles, or whatever it is, above her ankles in dirt, and alone, quite alone! What could she mean by it? It seems to me to show an abominable sort of conceited independence, a most country-town indifference to decorum” (194). Austen continues the foil when Jane visits the Gardners in London and sits in their house waiting for Miss Bingley to call while Elizabeth visits Charlotte at Hunsford and explores the woods and spends time with Lady Catherine. While Jane stays home and silently accepts her fate over losing Bingley, Elizabeth is on a walking tour with the Gardners. Even while performing the traditionally domestic role of nurse to Jane, Elizabeth exhibits strength. When she is taken to Jane and sees how ill she is, she “silently attended her” (193). Her usefulness in this situation reveals the rightness of her action in coming and the wrongness of those who consider her coming, as Elizabeth does, as improper. Austen shows that in many cases it is a good thing that Elizabeth resists society's sexual stereotypes and will not submit to its expectations (Hardy 47). Proceeding from the above stated, it is quite evident that Elizabeth and Jane, although the antithesis of one another, are constructive representations of Victorian womanhood. The one represents women on the brink of change and development and the other the ideal Victorian female, passive and submissive. Austen’s sympathetic representation of both, contributes to readers’ appreciation of both examples. This stands in direct contrast to Dickens’ representations of womanhood. Although they are unconventional and hardly expressive of the Victorian ideal, they are not positive or constructive examples of womanhood. Taken together, however, both Dickens and Austen’s female characters negate popular conceptions of Victorian women as passive, submissive and largely colourless. These authors show that the later Victorian woman had many faces and characters and was a defiance of popular stereotypes and conventions; indeed, she was a woman in search of identity, equality and independence. Bibliography Hardy, John. Jane Austen's Heroines. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1984. Hartog, Curt. “The Rape of Miss Havisham.” Studies in the Novel, 14 (1982): 248-65. Gilbert, Sandra, and Susan Gubar. The Madwoman in the Attic. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1984. Jarmuth, Sylvia L. Dickens' Use of Women in His Novels. New York: Excelsior Publishing Company, 1967. Monod, Sylvere. Dickens the Novelist. Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press, 1968. Morgan, Susan. “Intelligence in Pride and Prejudice.” Modern Critical Interpretations: Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice. New York: Chelsea House, 1987. 85-105. Slater, Michael. Dickens and Women. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1983. Smith, Leroy W. Jane Austen and the Drama of Woman. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1983. Wilson, Angus. The World of Charles Dickens. New York: The Viking Press, 1970. Read More